Guidebook on Building Airport Workforce Capacity (2018)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

6-1 Chapter 6: Recommendations for Continuous Airport Workforce Capacity Building Workforce capacity building reflects the potential of U.S. airports to respond effectively and efficiently to emerging job demands in the face of industry changes and trends. As airports balance new entrepreneurial business models with traditional governance structures, adopt new technologies, and face changes in workforce demographics, it will be critical for the airport workforce to have the ability to adapt to a dynamic work environment and effectively support airport operations. Chapter Overview This chapter provides a brief review of the need to implement the workforce capacity building strategies included in the previous chapters of the Guidebook. Additionally, this chapter includes an overview of change management techniques critical to effectively implementing, sustaining, and continuously evaluating any workforce strategies an airport seeks to adopt. Change management must be embedded within the implementation of each strategy to ensure buy-in from leadership, the board of directors, targeted employees within the airport, and potentially the local community. This buy-in is what moves a strategy concept to a full organizational practice. The sustainability of a practice requires ongoing engagement and participation from the workforce, as well as continuous evaluation and refinement to maintain its effectiveness. Furthermore, continuous evaluation helps identify gaps as new job demands and needs emerge in the industry. Therefore, this chapter includes general recommendations that can and should be applied across all strategies in this Guidebook for successful use of workforce capacity building practices. Guidebook in Review The strategies in this Guidebook are intended to address capacity gaps in the airport industry’s workforce identified through extensive market analysis, assessment of training and education programs, and input gathered directly from airport industry leaders and stakeholders. Additionally, the strategies in this Guidebook reflect evidence-based workforce practices that have already produced positive workforce changes and increased capacity for some airports as well as for organizations within other industries that face similar challenges with their workforce (e.g., baby boomers retiring). Finally, the strategies in this Guidebook have been vetted with airport industry leaders for relevance and applicability. Still, it is important to note that there is no “one size fits all” approach to workforce capacity building. As this research demonstrates, airports of varying sizes, locations, and governance

6-2 Guidebook on Building Airport Workforce Capacity structures often deal with different types of challenges. The strategies and action plans included in this Guidebook are intended to address the most common challenges different airport types across the United States are facing currently and expected to face within the next 5–10 years. As reflected in the Alternative Approaches section of each action plan, airports may need to modify the implementation approach they use to effectively apply the strategy under any existing constraints (e.g., budgetary constraints, staffing constraints). Ultimately, it is critical for all airports to focus resources on workforce capacity building, where possible, to maintain effective operations in the rapidly evolving industry. Change Management Framework As airports implement strategies included in this Guidebook, the airport must consider how receptive and prepared the organization is for the resulting changes. Successful strategy implementation requires generating and sustaining organization- wide buy-in and continued commitment to the initiative(s) that result from the strategy. Airports must effectively manage all aspects of change that come with the strategy. Being prepared for change is often referred to as being in a “state of readiness.” Airports can achieve this state of readiness by following a change management framework throughout implementation. Change management focuses on stakeholder collaboration and buy-in to create a sustainable and positive change, rather than simply trying to minimize resistance. There are many elements of the airport and its operating environment that must be considered as a part of change management. As displayed in Exhibit 5, the four critical phases of change management require full integration with the existing airport infrastructure and its goals, technology, and systems/processes. It is important that airports consider how existing goals, processes, and technology can be leveraged to facilitate change. It is also important to consider what additional goals, technology, and processes will be needed to support and sustain the practices and what skill sets people may need to utilize those new systems. Further, the airport needs to consider the current workforce and key stakeholders (“the people”) and their bandwidth for change (e.g., consider the number of recent changes experienced and the impact on employees’ jobs). Change management also requires taking a critical look at the organizational culture to determine whether current beliefs and attitudes may The goal of change management is to create a sustainable and positive change by focusing on stakeholder collaboration and buy-in early on in development and implementation. Exhibit 5. Change Management Framework

Recommendations for Continuous Airport Workforce Capacity Building 6-3 be obstacles to change and what messaging is needed for different audiences to help facilitate receptivity to the changes. Given that the workforce and stakeholders – the people – are at the core of any change management initiative, it is important to consider what will help engage and motivate those individuals to support strategic changes. Airports should also be sensitive to how changes will be perceived, such as whether employees will feel their jobs are in jeopardy, and airports should make sure employees have the tools and resources necessary to support change. Support can be gained for new initiatives by engaging the airport’s “people” in decision- making surrounding the changes needed. The following sections provide an overview of each of the four major phases of the change management framework, as depicted in the outside ring of Exhibit 5. Phase 1: Establish the Case for Change During Phase 1, champions for adoption of the new strategy and leads for strategy implementation (e.g., HR personnel, executive leaders) should be identified. Champions should be those who are influential across the organization, while leads are the individuals who will guide program development and usage. Both champions and leads help document and spread the word about why a strategy is necessary and how it will help improve airport operations and performance. While it is important to communicate anticipated outcomes to executive leadership, the board of directors, and those who may wield political influence over the airport, it is equally important to tailor communication for employees. Specifically, the following should be communicated to employees: • Why is the airport implementing this strategy? • What is the airport changing to facilitate implementation of this strategy? • How will the strategy and proposed changes directly impact me as an employee? (e.g., How will the daily tasks of my job be affected? What new skills will I need to develop in response to these new requirements?) • What benefits will this strategy afford me as an employee? • What challenges are anticipated and how will they be addressed? Individuals should then have the opportunity to provide feedback and voice concerns or ask questions regarding the proposed strategy and implementation through forums, team meetings, surveys, focus groups, or similar methods. The following example demonstrates how an airport would want to communicate about the implementation of a new career pathways strategy, particularly to leadership and employees whose jobs will be featured within the eventual pathways.

6-4 Guidebook on Building Airport Workforce Capacity Phase 2: Plan for the Change This second phase in the change management framework involves developing a plan for managing, implementing, evaluating, and sustaining changes associated with the strategy. While the action plans included in this Guidebook provide information regarding resources, obtaining buy-in, implementation steps, measures for evaluation, and more, airports will need to integrate this information into a specific plan to implement the change at their airport. For example, the action plan for a specific strategy can be augmented with an evaluation plan that outlines specific measures of success, data sources, data collection methods, and data analyses the airport plans to use. As part of this phase, it is also beneficial to develop a strategic communications plan that documents how to disseminate information about the changes occurring and promote the plan for change to each of the appropriate audiences and stakeholders. Specifically, a communication plan should identify the following: • Key individuals and stakeholders affected by the changes • Specific content based on audience type (both internal and external to the airport, such as employees or community organizations) • Medium for communications to each audience (e.g., newsletter; memorandum; email) • Scheduling and frequency of communication for each audience • Intended purpose and outcome of the communication • Communication lead(s) who will initiate correspondence Developing a plan can also help airports identify where there are risks or gaps in resources or support that may impede effective implementation. Identifying these gaps in the planning phase allows for the flexibility to determine an alternative course of action or identify how to mitigate risks beforehand. The plan can then serve as a blueprint against which to assess progress as implementation begins. Phase 3: Implement the Change In this phase, the airport engages in full implementation of the strategy and manages associated changes. However, prior to implementation, it is best to pilot the strategy with a subset of the Example: Making the Case for Career Pathways For Executives: Career pathways help employees perceive opportunity at the airport, which has been shown by research to increase retention. Retention helps maintain continuity in airport operations as employees advance through the organization increasing their airport-specific business and operations acumen. For Employees: Career pathways demonstrate the potential opportunities available to you at the airport, whether you want to advance in a managerial role or technical role. The pathways also specify the knowledge, skills, abilities, training, education, and other developmental opportunities that will be beneficial for you to complete to advance in your career. Leadership will be interested in hearing your perspectives on what experiences and developmental opportunities have been valuable in helping you prepare for advancement so those elements can be emphasized in the pathways and ultimately shared with others.

Recommendations for Continuous Airport Workforce Capacity Building 6-5 organization. For example, if the airport is implementing a formal mentoring program, it may choose to pilot the program with one department to assess its potential and resolve unforeseen challenges before expending resources on an airport-wide implementation. A successful pilot also helps gain greater support and buy-in from across the organization. For example, employees in the airport’s IT department may hear positive information regarding the pilot mentoring program in the Operations department, leading to greater enthusiasm, engagement, and participation in the eventual airport-wide program. For any large initiative that will widely impact the airport, it is critical for senior and executive leaders to be involved during implementation. Although they may not be involved in the day-to- day activities, it is important that top management actively promotes and disseminates information regarding the strategy. This support, coupled with execution of the communication plan developed in the previous phase, can further generate enthusiasm and commitment for the strategy across the airport. It is possible that unanticipated barriers may arise during implementation. In the event this occurs, implementation leads should revisit the plan and make amendments and improvements as appropriate. Phase 4: Evaluate and Sustain the Change This final phase of the change management framework deals with sustainability. Implementing strategies from this Guidebook is only the first step in creating a positive and effective change that has deep and lasting impacts on the airport, its workforce, and the broader industry. Sustainability ensures that those involved in the practice remain interested and engaged in the changes taking effect. This continuous momentum in turn helps maintain and sustain the practice. As with the other phases in the change management framework, communication is an essential piece of sustainability. In this phase, it is necessary to clearly demonstrate and communicate positive outcomes and results of the practice to maintain support. For example, consider an airport that has implemented an internal leadership academy to support succession planning for senior leader positions. Airport executives and the board of directors may want to see the return on investment this has had, such as a decrease in external recruiting costs for senior leader positions or increased retention for mid-level employees in the academy. Demonstrating these types of results requires measuring, assessing, and evaluating the practices. The data can then be used to continue promoting and improving the practice.

6-6 Guidebook on Building Airport Workforce Capacity Evaluating Success Together, a focus on sustainability and evaluation reveals what is working well, where there are gaps, and what needs to be improved or refined. There are a variety of methods and formats that can be used to conduct the evaluation depending on the measures of success identified and types of data collected. For example, the airport may be able to collect data on retention and turnover rates before and after implementation of career pathways. As another example, the airport may be able to collect and analyze human resource data regarding the reaction of applicants to recruitment initiatives prior and then again months after implementing an employer branding strategy. This data can then be used to demonstrate the success and effectiveness of the practice to executives and political leaders who may wield influence over the funding and resources necessary to maintain it. Particularly, these stakeholders may want to see the return on investment, impact on the bottom line, impact on airport performance, or other organization- level outcomes. Data can also be collected in the form of feedback directly from employees and stakeholders through surveys, interviews, and focus groups. Once gathered and analyzed, the data can then be used to improve workforce practices to meet emerging needs. Additionally, positive feedback can be used in communication materials to increase and/or maintain participation and interest across the airport. Metric Scorecards. One of the challenges airports face in evaluating the impact and value of implementing workforce development strategies is knowing what to measure and understanding what “good” looks like. To assist airports with evaluating and comparing the effectiveness of various workforce strategies in each of the challenge areas, three metric scorecards have been developed (one per challenge area). Each scorecard consists of five metrics aligned with the corresponding challenge area as well as five global metrics that can be utilized and compared across all three challenge areas. Details on how to use and adapt the scorecards to a specific airport are provided below, along with definitions of both the global and specific metrics for each scorecard. The metric scorecards themselves begin on page 6-11. How to Use the Metric Scorecards The metric scorecards presented on subsequent pages can be used to evaluate existing workforce programs or strategies that are under consideration for implementation. The purpose of these scorecards is not to compare one organization to another or to formally evaluate the airport. Rather, these scorecards can be used internally to compare various practices to determine the most effective way to utilize resources. Further, while some of the metrics require data collection from airport employees, the scorecards are not designed to be used as a performance evaluation for any individual employee. Instead, by aggregating data across employees and across metrics, the airport can evaluate or estimate the impact of particular initiatives. Data Collection Methods • HR system/database • Performance management system • Learning management system • Surveys • Focus groups • Interviews • Forums

Recommendations for Continuous Airport Workforce Capacity Building 6-7 The 10 metrics (five specific and five global) provided in each scorecard should be used together to evaluate a single workforce strategy so that the total score on the scorecard provides an overall rating for a single strategy. A new scorecard can be completed for a second strategy if comparison is desired. To perform this evaluation, ratings for each metric should be selected based on the anchors provided in the scorecard (four anchors per metric). These anchors provide descriptions that characterize varying levels of performance on the metric – from low to high – to help rate the level of effectiveness. After rating a strategy on each metric, the airport can total all the ratings to assess the overall impact of the strategy or compare across multiple strategies. To further explain how to use the metric scorecards, consider the example metric in the table below. Example of Metric and Anchors Metrics Rating Scales 0–25 26–50 51–75 76–100 1. Percent of trainees satisfied with training Less than 50% satisfied 50% to 75% satisfied 75% to 90% satisfied Greater than 90% satisfied Using this example, if post-training surveys for this specific training and development program show that 77% of trainees are satisfied with the training program, this program may be given a rating of 52 based on the anchors in the above table. If post-training surveys for another program show that 85% of trainees are satisfied with the program, this second program may be given a rating of 65. The choice in the absolute score given on each metric is not as important as consistency in scoring methods. For example, if an airport leader gave the second program described above a 67 instead of a 65, this would be acceptable as long the same logic used to generate that score is applied when comparing another training program of interest along the same metric. Once ratings are assigned for each of the metrics contained in a scorecard, a total score should be computed by summing each of the individual metric ratings. This number can help provide an overall assessment of the past or projected effectiveness of a strategy that can then be compared internally to other strategies. When using these metrics to evaluate a workforce strategy, performance on one metric should not be the sole determinant of whether a strategy is effective. While the metrics were selected to align as much as possible with each challenge area, there could be a range of factors that impact the performance on that metric beyond the impact of the strategy. Therefore, performance on multiple metrics should be considered when evaluating workforce practices, and individual ratings should not be used as the sole source for evaluating the success of the strategy. Adjusting or Creating Metric Scorecard Anchors While the anchors included in the scorecards were developed to be applicable to a wide range of airports, individual airports may find that the anchors do not meet their specific needs or apply to their environment. In this case, the anchors can be adjusted slightly so that they are more applicable to the airport utilizing the scorecards. An example of how the anchors can be adjusted is presented below.

6-8 Guidebook on Building Airport Workforce Capacity Example of Metric and Original Anchors Metrics Rating Scales 0–25 26–50 51–75 76–100 1. Time to fill position Over 4 months Greater than 2 up to 4 months Greater than 1 up to 2 months Less than 1 month When trying to evaluate the impact of two potential recruitment programs using this metric and its associated anchors, an airport may find that all of their operations are already filled in less than two months. In this case, they may want to adjust the anchors to better differentiate between various recruitment programs that target operations personnel. When revising any of the anchors, it is important to make sure that the revised anchors follow these guidelines: • The anchors should form a continuous scale (i.e., there is not a break between categories so all possible values are covered); • Each anchor should be mutually exclusive (i.e., there should be no overlap in scale points); and • The same anchors should be used when evaluating programs for comparison with one another. Using these guidelines, the anchors could be revised as shown in the following table to better meet the needs of the airport described. Example of Metric and Revised Anchors Metrics Rating Scales 0–25 26–50 51–75 76–100 1. Time to fill position Over 2 months Greater than 1 up to 2 months Greater than 2 weeks up to 1 month Less than 2 weeks Metric Definitions This section provides the definition for each of the metrics included in the scorecards. The definitions of the global metrics, which apply to all three challenge areas, are provided first, followed by the definitions of metrics for the scorecards related to each challenge area. Some of the definitions include parameters that can help apply the metrics consistently. However, if airports are unable to measure the metrics in the suggested way due to limitations in their own data collection capabilities, they should redefine the metrics as needed. As long as they are applied consistently across strategies and the anchors are appropriate, the exercise should remain valid. Global Metrics • Stakeholder buy-in: The support available for a specific strategy from important internal or external stakeholders (e.g., management, employees, unions, board members). This metric considers the amount of understanding that stakeholders have of a practice and their willingness to sponsor or promote the implementation of that practice. • Time to implement: The amount of time required to fully put a new practice into action. This metric includes time for developing and pilot testing the practice, plus the time that is necessary to launch the practice.

Recommendations for Continuous Airport Workforce Capacity Building 6-9 Cost to implement: The cost of developing and implementing a practice compared to the planned or pre-determined budget. If no defined budget has been set, a rough order of magnitude budget should be developed to use as a standard of comparison. Time to achieve ROI: The amount of time necessary to realize the desired outcomes after a practice has been fully implemented. This metric can be used to compare practices to determine which are anticipated to have the greatest impact in the least amount of time. Note that the metric does not compare the true financial return on investment (ROI), as this may be difficult to calculate or estimate, but airports are welcome to use such a metric and develop corresponding anchors. Sustainability: The ability to maintain a program over time at its intended level after the initial implementation. Specifically, sustainability refers to the level of maintenance required to keep a program up-to-date in the face of evolving technology, new workplace procedures and policies, or other factors that might affect the applicability of the program. Attracting New Talent Metrics Time to fill position: The average time required to recruit and hire applicants to fill open positions. A consistent time period should be used when comparing two practices along the same metric. The amount of time to fill a position is quantified as the number of days between the time when approval to hire for that position is granted (prior to any marketing of the open position) until the formal acceptance of a job offer by a candidate. New hire turnover within the first year: This metric indicates the proportion of new hires who leave the airport (either voluntarily or involuntarily) during their first year of employment. This metric can also be applied to a specific category of airport occupations, which may require revisions to the anchors. Percentage of offers accepted: The percentage of job offers accepted out of the number of job offers that were extended. A low percentage of offers accepted would indicate that many of the individuals to whom job offers were given did not choose to accept employment with the airport, whereas a high percentage of offers accepted would indicate that many of the individuals who received job offers accepted them. New hire performance ratings: Assessment of the extent to which newly hired employees are meeting the airport’s performance standards and expectations. In order to standardize the metric across positions, the anchors pertain to how new hires compare to the current workforce. Total recruiting costs: A summation of all recruiting costs [e.g., advertising, placement fees, employee referrals, travel and lodging, relocation, reference checking, or any other recruitment/hiring costs (Employer’s Association, 2010)] in relation to the current or projected budget for such costs. If all of these costs are not currently tracked, the airport could include as many of the costs as it can reliably capture. Building Internal Staff Capacity Metrics Pre/post knowledge/skill gain: Measurement of the knowledge or skills acquired during a training or development program. Specifically, this metric assesses whether participation in a program helped trainees gain knowledge and skills that were the focus

6-10 Guidebook on Building Airport Workforce Capacity of the program. For this metric, both pre- and post-tests are used so that any learning can be attributed to the training or development program that trainees complete. Pre/post employee performance ratings: Review of improvement in on-the-job performance of employees who have participated in a training or development program. This metric is used to determine whether the training program has the intended effect on the actual job performance of employees. Percentage of employees able to participate: The proportion of the workforce that is able and invited to participate in a program. Although some programs may not be appropriate for all employees (e.g., leadership development programs), in general, a program that is able to reach more of the workforce should have a broader impact. Percentage of participants satisfied with experience: The proportion of those who have participated in the program who report being satisfied with the experience. This can often be assessed through a survey with a 5-point scale on which the top two response options (typically “satisfied” and “very satisfied”) are considered positive responses. Turnover following participation: The percentage difference between the proportion of participants who leave the organization during the year and the proportion of non- participants who leave during the year. If participants are leaving at a lower rate, this could indicate that the program had a positive impact on their performance and/or desire to remain with the organization. Planning for Future Workforce Needs Metrics Employee voluntary turnover rate: The proportion of the workforce that leaves the organization in a given year. Organizations with high levels of turnover are at greater risk of future workforce gaps, and some strategies in this area can help to increase employee commitment to the organization. Percentage of employees who participate in employee development activities: The proportion of the workforce who participate in employee development activities designed to better prepare them for advancement or anticipated workforce needs. This would generally not include training activities that are related to routine job performance. Percentage of management positions with at least one qualified internal replacement: The proportion of management and/or leadership positions for which the airport has identified (or can identify) at least one direct replacement from their current workforce if that manager were to leave the organization. This metric helps to demonstrate effective workforce and succession planning. Employee organizational commitment: A measure of employee self-reported intentions to remain with the organization. This demonstrates employee commitment to the organization and could help to minimize risks of a high number of vacancies occurring in the near future. Percentage of vacancies open longer than 1 month: The number of job vacancies occurring in the year that remain open for at least 1 month divided by the total number of vacancies in that year. Airports with more effective workforce planning strategies tend to have fewer long-term vacancies as they will have planned strategically, been less surprised by staffing needs, and taken action in advance of expected vacancies. The following pages contain the scorecards for each of the three challenge areas.

Attracting New Talent Strategy Scorecard Title of Practice: (Enter here) Metrics Attracting New Talent Rating Scales (Based on experience or projections) Score 0–25 26–50 51–75 76–100 1. Time to fill position • Over 8 months • Greater than 5 up to8 months • 2 up to 5 months • Less than 2 months 2. New hire turnover within the first year • More than 40% of new hires turnover • Over 20% up to 40% of new hires turnover • 10% to 20% of new hires turnover • Less than 10% of new hires turnover 3. Percentage of offers accepted • Less than 40% of offers accepted • More than 40% up to 60% of offers accepted • More than 60% up to 80% of offers accepted • More than 80% of offers accepted 4. New hire performance rating • Bottom 25% of employees • Slightly lower than average employees • Slightly higher than average employees • Top 25% of employees 5. Total recruiting costs • More than budget target • Right at budget target • Slightly under budget target • Significantly under budget target Attracting New Talent Sub-score: Metrics Global Rating Scales (Based on experience or projections) Score 0–25 26–50 51–75 76–100 6. Stakeholder buy-in • Stakeholders unaware of program • Stakeholders know of program but have a lot of questions • Stakeholders understand program and have few questions • Stakeholders already onboard 7. Time to implement • Over 1 year • Over 6 months up to1 year • 3 up to 6 months • Less than 3 months 8. Cost to implement • More than budget target • Right at budget target • Slightly under budget target • Significantly under budget target 9. Time to achieve ROI • 3 years or more • Over 1 year up to3 years • 6 months up to 1 year • Less than 6 months 10. Sustainability • One-time program • Program must be continually updated to remain current • Program can be updated annually and reused • Program can be continually used with minimal maintenance Global Ratings Sub-score: Total Score: Likelihood of Success Total Metrics Score Success Very Unlikely 0–250 Success Unlikely 251–500 Success Likely 501–750 Success Very Likely 751–1000

Building Internal Staff Capacity Strategy Scorecard Title of Practice: (Enter here) Metrics Building Internal Staff Capacity Rating Scales (Based on experience or projections) Score 0–25 26–50 51–75 76–100 1. Pre/post knowledge/skill gain • Testing indicates less than 60% post-training effectiveness • Testing indicates 60% up to 80% post-training effectiveness • Testing indicates greater than 80% up to 90% post- training effectiveness • Testing indicates 90% or greater post-training effectiveness 2. Pre/post employee performance ratings • Performance decreases post-training • Performance remains the same post-training • Performance improved somewhat post-training • Performance is greatly improved post-training 3. Percentage of employees able to participate • Less than 50% able to participate • 50% up to 75% able to participate • Greater than 75% up to 90% able to participate • Greater than 90% able to participate 4. Percentage of participants satisfied with experience • Less than 50% satisfied • 50% up to 75% satisfied • Greater than 75% up to 90% satisfied • Greater than 90% satisfied 5. Turnover following participation • Participants have a higher turnover rate • Participants have the same or less than a 5% lower turnover rate • Participants have a 5% to 10% lower turnover rate • Participants have more than a 10% lower turnover rate Building Internal Staff Capacity Sub-score: Metrics Global Rating Scales (Based on experience or projections) Score 0–25 26–50 51–75 76–100 6. Stakeholder buy-in • Stakeholders unaware of program • Stakeholders know of program but have a lot of questions • Stakeholders understand program and have few questions • Stakeholders already onboard 7. Time to implement • Over 1 year • Over 6 months up to1 year • 3 up to 6 months • Less than 3 months 8. Cost to implement • More than budget target • Right at budget target • Slightly under budget target • Significantly under budget target 9. Time to reach ROI/full potential • Over 3 years • Over 1 year up to3 years • 6 months up to 1 year • Less than 6 months 10. Sustainability • One-time program • Program must be continually updated to remain current • Program can be updated annually and reused • Program can be continually used with minimal maintenance Global Ratings Sub-score: Total Score: Likelihood of Success Total Metrics Score Success Very Unlikely 0–250 Success Unlikely 251–500 Success Likely 501–750 Success Very Likely 751–1000

Planning for Future Workforce Needs Strategy Scorecard Title of Practice: (Enter here) Metrics Planning for Future Workforce Needs Rating Scales (Based on experience or projections) Score 0–25 26–50 51–75 76–100 1. Employee voluntary turnover rate • Greater than 10% turnover • Greater than 5% up to 10% turnover • Greater than 2% up to 5% turnover • Less than 2% turnover 2. Percentage of employees who participate in employee development activities • 20% or less of employees; system does not have opportunities • Greater than 20% up to 40% of employees • Greater than 40% up to 60% of employees • Over 60% of employees 3. Percentage of management positions with qualified internal replacement available • 25% or less of management positions • Over 25% up to 50% of management positions • Over 50% up to 75% of management positions • Over 75% of management positions 4. Employee organizational commitment • Less than 25% intend to remain for 5 years or more • 25% up to 50% intend to remain for 5 years or more • 50% up to 75% intend to remain for 5 years or more • Greater than 75% intend to remain for 5 years or more 5. Percentage of vacancies open longer than 1 month • Over 75% of vacancies • Over 50% up to 75% of vacancies • 25% up to 50% of vacancies • Less than 25% of vacancies Planning for Future Workforce Needs Sub-score: Metrics Global Rating Scales (Based on experience or projections) Score 0–25 26–50 51–75 76–100 6. Stakeholder buy-in • Stakeholders unaware of program • Stakeholders know of program but have a lot of questions • Stakeholders understand program and have few questions • Stakeholders already onboard 7. Time to implement • Over 1 year • Over 6 months up to1 year • 3 up to 6 months • Less than 3 months 8. Cost to implement • More than budget target • Right at budget target • Slightly under budget target • Significantly under budget target 9. Time to reach ROI/full potential • Over 3 years • Over 1 year up to 3 years • 6 months up to 1 year • Less than 6 months 10.Sustainability • One-time program • Program must be continually updated to remain current • Program can be updated annually and reused • Program can be continually used with minimal maintenance Global Ratings Sub-score: Total Score: Likelihood of Success Total Metrics Score Success Very Unlikely 0–250 Success Unlikely 251–500 Success Likely 501–750 Success Very Likely 751–1000

6-14 Guidebook on Building Airport Workforce Capacity Final Thoughts In closing, the strategies provided in this Guidebook all include valuable practices that can be used in conjunction with one another or on their own. When paired with effective change management techniques, these strategies will help airports create a robust approach to workforce capacity building and planning versus needing to scramble to find employees with in-demand skill sets. Further, by investing in their current and future workforce, airports will communicate value to their workforce, which in turn drives employee engagement and subsequently productivity and retention – critical factors in such a fast-paced, customer-centric industry.